Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22675 (ALL)

NIRANJAN SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/5667/2025 · 2025-04-06

Anish Kumar Gupta, Manoj Kumar Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50022-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No.45) Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5667 of 2025 Petitioner :- Niranjan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anuruddh Chaturvedi,Shyam Sunder Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharmendra Singh Chauhan,Suresh C. Dwivedi Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. The petitioner has assailed the e-auction notice dated 07.02.2025 in respect of House No. 56, MIG-II, Jawahar Puram, Agra placed at Serial No. 10 in the e-acution notice. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent Development Authority has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner is claiming rights in the property on the basis of certain documents executed in his favour by Tejpal, power of attorney holder of the original allottee. He places reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in Ghanshyam vs. Yogendra Rathi, 2023 (7)) SCC 361 in submitting that on basis of power of attorney and agreement to sell, the petitioner cannot claim any right in the property. 3. A perusal of pleadings made in the writ petition reveals that the original allotment was in favour of one Gajendra Pratap Lavania. He executed an unregistered agreement to sell on 18.10.2004 in favour of Tejpal, his nephew. On the same date, he also executed a revocable General Power of Attorney in his favour. Tejpal acting as power of attorney of the original allottee Gajendra Pratap Lavania and not in his individual capacity, executed another power of attorney and agreement to sell, both dated 30.08.2005 in favour of the petitioner. Gajendra Pratap, the original allottee had died in the year 2012. The petitioner cannot claim any right in the property on the basis of agreement to sell and subsequent power of attorney executed in his favour by Tejpal, acting as power of attorney holder of original allottee. 4. Consequently, it is held that the petitioner has no locus as no right came to be transferred in his favour on basis of the aforesaid documents. 5. The writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Ashish Pd. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad